Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

Professor -

I’m disappointed to see that you’ve bought into the “Obama is smart” myth.  Absent a teleprompter his rhetoric is decidedly less than soaring, and in any event they aren’t his words (thank you, David Axelrod and staff).

Would a smart man with presidential ambitions spend 20 years in Jeremiah Wright’s church?  Associating in any way with Ayres and Dohrn?  Engaging in financial transactions with Tony Rezko?

And please don’t bring up the education credentials.  They are as tainted by the evil that is affirmative action as, oh, I don’t know, Clarence Thomas’s and Condoleeza Rice’s.

Finally, Obama smokes, which for the last 30 years has been a behavior (in this country, anyway) that is engaged in predominantly by the less-educated and intelligent.

What other evidence do you have of some high degree of intelligence on Obama’s part?

I hesitate to “feed the troll” but…

But, have you read “Dreams from my father”?

Nuff’ said.

I will assume that pollsters are not stupid, since they apparently make good money asking these stupid questions.  For all I know there is some correlation between “who would you invite to your cook-out” and who you’re inclined to vote for.  I am supposing here that pollsters, and the people who pay them, are ultimately interested in the “who you gonna vote for” statistics, but have learned to distrust the answer to such a direct and straightforward question.

If I got to be a pollster for a day, though, the questions I would field would be these:

“Which of the candidates would you prefer to have as your boss?”

“Which of the candidates would you rather hire to work for you?”

Maybe I would pose them both to each respondent; maybe I would run them as two separate polls.  In either case, I would follow up my question(s) with “who will you vote for?” My goal would not be to predict the election, but to figure out which voters view the President as their boss, which as their employee.  I am honestly curious to know the outcome of such a poll, but alas I cannot afford to commission it myself.

Just parenthetically, my all-time favorite quote about polling, from Republican operative Ed Rollins:  “Here in America, we hold elections to find out if the polls were right.”

-- TP

If you invited John, wouldn’t Cindy bring a lot of beer? 

Of course, it would be Bud.  Then again, I think Bud has some former microbrew brands it bought out.  I haven’t tried the organic pale ale, but it might be okay.

Benedict, I won’t remark n anything else, but the Professor’s been known to enjoy a cigar once in a while.

I have several reaganite friends that don’t even think in voting for McCain. Definitely he is not even close to President Reagan. As far as for all those liberals that are planning voting for McCain… good look on this one because I don’t think he is even close to winning (see Dick Morris projections)

Budweiser:  Bottled hangover.

Benedict—all I can say is that you cons lose more and more credibility when you refuse to acknowledge the obvious: to get into Columbia as as a transfer, you have to have strong grades.  To get into Harvard, ditto.  To graduate magna cum and president of the Law Review?  G.m.a.f.b. with the “affirmative action” explanation.  I won’t even get into his evaluations as a con law professor, which were steller.

Given his credentials, the more you cons try to deny Obama’s intellectual abilities, the more it seems you have some “bias” against him.  And when you add in the “affirmative action” argument, the nature of your bias becomes rather obvious.

B-Rob:

It’s spelled stellar. 

Regards,

Biased Con

"I have several reaganite friends that don’t even think in voting for McCain. Definitely he is not even close to President Reagan.”

Why didn’t anyone tell me Reagan was running?